Literature DB >> 29501241

Identification of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and airway bacterial colonization by an electronic nose in bronchiectasis.

Guillermo Suarez-Cuartin1, Jordi Giner1, José Luis Merino2, Ana Rodrigo-Troyano1, Anna Feliu1, Lidia Perea3, Ferran Sanchez-Reus4, Diego Castillo1, Vicente Plaza1, James D Chalmers5, Oriol Sibila6.   

Abstract

RATIONALE: Airway colonization by Potentially Pathogenic Microorganisms (PPM) in bronchiectasis is associated with worse clinical outcomes. The electronic nose is a non-invasive technology capable of distinguishing volatile organic compounds (VOC) in exhaled breath. We aim to explore if an electronic nose can reliably discriminate airway bacterial colonization in patients with bronchiectasis.
METHODS: Seventy-three clinically stable bronchiectasis patients were included. PPM presence was determined using sputum culture. Exhaled breath was collected in Tedlar bags and VOC breath-prints were detected by the electronic nose Cyranose 320®. Raw data was reduced to three factors with principal component analysis. Univariate ANOVA followed by post-hoc least significant difference test was performed with these factors. Patients were then classified using linear canonical discriminant analysis. Cross-validation accuracy values were defined by the percentage of correctly classified patients.
RESULTS: Forty-one (56%) patients were colonized with PPM. Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 27, 66%) and Haemophilus influenzae (n = 7, 17%) were the most common PPM. VOC breath-prints from colonized and non-colonized patients were significantly different (accuracy of 72%, AUROC 0.75, p < 0.001). VOC breath-prints from Pseudomonas aeruginosa colonized patients were significantly different from those of patients colonized with other PPM (accuracy of 89%, AUROC 0.97, p < 0.001) and non-colonized patients (accuracy 73%, AUROC 0.83, p = 0.007).
CONCLUSIONS: An electronic nose can accurately identify VOC breath-prints of clinically stable bronchiectasis patients with airway bacterial colonization, especially in those with Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bronchiectasis; Electronic nose; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; Volatile organic compounds

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29501241     DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2018.02.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Respir Med        ISSN: 0954-6111            Impact factor:   3.415


  5 in total

Review 1.  Breath-Based Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases: A Review of the Current Landscape.

Authors:  Chiranjit Ghosh; Armando Leon; Seena Koshy; Obadah Aloum; Yazan Al-Jabawi; Nour Ismail; Zoe Freeman Weiss; Sophia Koo
Journal:  Clin Lab Med       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 2.172

Review 2.  Potential of the Electronic Nose for the Detection of Respiratory Diseases with and without Infection.

Authors:  Johann-Christoph Licht; Hartmut Grasemann
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-12-10       Impact factor: 5.923

3.  Aspergillus Is Inhibited by Pseudomonas aeruginosa Volatiles.

Authors:  Hasan Nazik; Gabriele Sass; Eric Déziel; David A Stevens
Journal:  J Fungi (Basel)       Date:  2020-07-25

Review 4.  The smell of lung disease: a review of the current status of electronic nose technology.

Authors:  I G van der Sar; N Wijbenga; M E Hellemons; C C Moor; G Nakshbandi; J G J V Aerts; O C Manintveld; M S Wijsenbeek
Journal:  Respir Res       Date:  2021-09-17

5.  The Effect of Tedlar Bags on the Composition of Exhaled Human Breath Samples.

Authors:  Jiuyan Zhao; Lanlan Zhu; Wei Zhang
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 2.650

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.